Abstract
BackgroundThe purpose of the present study was to test the H0-hypothesis of no difference in the clinical and radiographical treatment outcome of single-crown restorations supported by short implants compared with standard length implants in conjunction with maxillary sinus floor augmentation (MSFA) after 1 year of functional implant loading. Forty patients with partial edentulism in the posterior part of the maxilla were randomly allocated to treatment involving single-crown restorations supported by short implants or standard length implants in conjunction with MSFA. Clinical and radiographical evaluation were used to assess survival of suprastructures and implants, peri-implant marginal bone loss (PIMBL), biological, and mechanical complications.ResultsBoth treatment modalities were characterized by 100% survival of suprastructures and implants after 1 year. Mean PIMBL was 0.60 mm with short implants compared with 0.51 mm with standard length implants after 1 year of functional loading. There were no statistically significant differences in survival of suprastructure and implants, PIMBL, and mechanical complications between the two treatment modalities. However, a higher incidence of biological complications was associated with standard length implants in conjunction with MSFA.ConclusionWithin the limitations of the present study, it can be concluded that single-crown restorations supported by short implants seems to be comparable with standard length implants in conjunction with MSFA. However, long-term studies are needed before final conclusions can be provided about the two treatment modalities.Trial registrationClinicaltrials.Gov ID: NCT04518020. Date of registration: August 14, 2020, retrospectively registered.
Highlights
The purpose of the present study was to test the H0-hypothesis of no difference in the clinical and radiographical treatment outcome of single-crown restorations supported by short implants compared with standard length implants in conjunction with maxillary sinus floor augmentation (MSFA) after 1 year of functional implant loading
Single-crown restorations supported by short implants (6 mm) compared with standard-length implants (13 mm) in conjunction with MSFA were assessed after 1 year of functional implant loading in the present study
Within the limitations of the present short-term study, it can be concluded that single-crown restorations supported by short implants (6 mm) seems to be a comparable treatment modality to standard-length implants (13 mm) in conjunction with MSFA for prosthetic rehabilitation of the posterior part of the maxilla after 1 year of functional implant loading
Summary
The purpose of the present study was to test the H0-hypothesis of no difference in the clinical and radiographical treatment outcome of single-crown restorations supported by short implants compared with standard length implants in conjunction with maxillary sinus floor augmentation (MSFA) after 1 year of functional implant loading. A newly published systematic review and meta-analysis demonstrated no statistically significant differences in implant survival or peri-implant marginal bone loss (PIMBL) after placement of short implants (≤ 8 mm) compared with standard length implants (> 8 mm) in conjunction with MSFA after 3 years of functional implant loading [12]. These results are in accordance with previously published systematic reviews assessing prosthetic rehabilitation in the posterior part of the maxilla with short implants [11, 13,14,15]. In a recently published systematic review and meta-analysis, it was concluded that placement of short implants (< 8 mm) involves a greater risk of implant failure [13], which is in accordance with the conclusions of other reviews [18, 19]
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
